Measuring Up

One citizen using his voice…

I’m steaming mad.

While driving to work this morning, I was pulled over in my town of Montclair by police in a completely bogus speed trap. Actually, approximately 16 cars were yanked to the side of the road in front of me, and in the 15 minutes I sat there (while the officer checked my ID, registration, etc.); another 7 cars were quickly forced to get in line, by those brave men in Montclair blue.

It seems that we were all offenders of driving the normal speed through a green light in which there is a crosswalk. According to the officer (who I questioned), there were two or three under cover cops either waiting on the side of the road, or about to cross the street. And, we committed an illegal driving act by not stopping to wait for them to do so. I was then handed a ticket 15 minutes later.

Here’s the problem I have with the entire ordeal (and it goes towards a much bigger problem in Montclair). This was no ordinary speed trap. Literally, eight cops were sitting at a table at the side of the road pulling over cars (it looked like they were selling PBA raffle tickets) and then another two or three were acting under cover. How could our town authorize 10 or more police officers to spend the day handing out tickets to town residents who are already being taxed beyond belief? Is this the way our taxes are being spent? The ticket is incidental. My bet is that over an eight hour period, these Starsky & Hutch’s of Montclair will end up handing out over 200 tickets.

Of course, I was outraged. So, I asked two of the cops why so many of them had to be there and questioned whether it was a good use of their time or our money. The arrogant response was, “don’t worry. Most of this crosswalk safety initiative is being financed by a state grant. It’s not impacting your taxes in the least.” That’s 100 percent inaccurate (and I explained why to the cop). Instead of only Montclair residents feeling the pinch, all New Jersey tax payers are feeding this grant with their tax money.

Just how “break through” and “innovative” is your press release?

It must be a slow news day, because The New York Times featured this half-page article about the art of writing a news release for media consumption.

Actually, the article takes an interesting angle (at least I think so) about what types of phrases and buzzwords should be highlighted in news releases to generate media interest. Tom Gable hit the nail on the head with his comments. Phrases like “cutting edge,” “break through,” “innovative,” “the first” and “mission critical” are simply terrible because they are over used (beyond belief) and editorialize a press release (a real no no in our business). I’ve heard many a good journalist say that if he/she receives a release that includes one of these catch phrases, the delete button is automatically pushed. Think about it, how many products in one category can really be “the first”?

As you can see, the story really focuses in on gimmicks or PR word stunts that will help a release break through all the clutter to make a journalist look twice and potentially want to cover it in a story. I love the first example – “Toxic Ties to New Shower Curtain” – because it worked in that regard. The story was picked up by some big time media outlets like ABCNews.com and US News & World Report. And, just as quickly…the story was rebuked and dismissed first by the Consumer Product Safety Commission and then by some of the same media who initially covered it. If the organization behind this press release had the singular goal of obtaining major coverage and didn’t care that the story was eventually seen as a sham, then it hit a home run in terms of coverage. Somehow, I doubt Peppercom clients would view that as a positive though…

One PR stunt planner and the author of “Dirty Little Secrets of PR Buzz” is a proponent of using such phrases as “safe,” “easy,” “secret,” and “breaking” in press releases because they suggest that something is new and fresh. I bet this book will sell like hotcakes and that’s unfortunate because this concept is just so wrong.

The bottom line is that if you believe that leveraging gimmicks, stunts and “creative uses of words” in press releases will generate more coverage, then you’re either in the wrong profession, or please fire your supposed PR practitioner/agency and go hire a new one. Sure, the toxic shower curtain release generated coverage. But, I would submit that this type of pick up has an extremely low percentage (there’s a big difference in generating a second look versus actual coverage). And, even when it does happen, look at the end result. This organization looks worse after all the coverage (as its testing methodology was called into question).

It is true that every media outlet has fewer journalists these days, covering many more stories. And, we all know that the amount of releases and story ideas being emailed and sent to journalists has created an inordinate amount of competition to generate coverage for clients. But, one constant fact remains – the “guts” of the news or story within any press release is what really matters (of course, packaging the news in a creative way is critical too). And, those public relations professionals who build long term relationships with journalists won’t have to worry about drawing upon such shallow gimmicks because they only present real, substantive story opportunities to their media contacts. In fact, it’s safe to say that these relationships were most likely built on this very strategy.

I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that part of the story also focused on SEO (search engine optimization) strategies around building eyeballs on the Web for press releases. This actually has very little to do with traditional story building with media. So, the key word optimization strategies surrounding successful SEO are 180 degrees different and are based upon emphasizing the right words and phrases.

Has the ugly caterpillar transformed into a beautiful butterfly?

Yesterday my morning train into New York City was rerouted through Hoboken, that small city in New Jersey by the river. It's amazing for me to see how this once mob run, forgettable town is now growing by leaps and bounds. In fact, Hoboken has actually gone through a complete (and I mean complete) metamorphous.

I know this because approximately 20 years ago, Hoboken was my first home away from home after graduating college and landing a job in The Big Apple. Back then, I lovingly referred to it as "Hohell" because... well... it was a less than desirable place for many to live.

The city was perfect for college grads who needed a stepping stone before moving on up into costly Manhattan. But it was also rundown, overloaded with low end cigar, pawn and bizarre second-hand shops and its infrastructure was literally falling apart (potholed roads, antiquated buildings and minimal government services.) What I remember the most, though, was the unbelievable contrast between the local blue-collar ethnic inhabitants who had lived there for many generations, the scores of 22-24 year old kids (like me) who simply exploited the cheap rents and plentiful bars as a place to drink, party and sleep, and those lower-income, crime infested neighborhoods which consumed all the rest of Hoboken that fell outside the 4 x 14 street grid. Hoboken was a complete conflict back then. It was also an urban enclave that was near death.

And, today... wow. Hoboken has became the new hip enclave for many well off white-collar professionals who don’t want Manhattan, aren’t ready for the suburbs, but want to own their own high-end condominium. Scores of high-rises have been built showcasing unreal skylines of New York City, many modern and luxury retailers have set up shop and the modern infrastructure has attracted a number of well known local celebrities including Eli Manning (of those world champion NY Giants.) And, the city is raking in hundreds of millions of $$$ though all of its development.

Some might call this metamorphous a miracle. Think about other lower-end cities that have long passed their day in the sun— such as Waterbury CT, Newark NJ, Worcester MA, etc. The mayors of these cities could only dream of drinking some of the magic elixir that has made Hoboken relevant again.

The deal that never was

We're a very skeptical bunch (consumers.) Companies are always making promises to us about guaranteed low prices, industry first deals and new products that will solve our pain like never before.

The plain fact is that most of these sales pitches are just that. The reality never fulfills the promise and we continue to lose trust in the meanwhile.

It's sad (really shameful) to see how Citigroup has let its credit card customers down in this exact way. Boy does this behemoth have egg on its face now.

The global bank made a big stink last year through its "A deal is a deal" slogan. Behind it, is the absolute promise that the mega financial services firm would no longer reserve the right to raise interest rates on credit cards at any time, for any reason (which is a huge promise.) The program was publicized ad nauseum so the bank would receive credit among all its key constituents.

And, boy did it. Tremendous accolades poured in from Congress, regulatory agencies and the public at large. And, at the time, they were well deserved because Citigroup was taking a stand. It would become the first bank to turn 180 degrees away from the industry tradition of gouging consumers through an array of costly interest rate increases without any warning.

Wow. What a bank.

Do you measure up?

While watching TV Sunday night, I heard about an interesting poll (my apologies because I forgot who is behind it.)  On average, Americans usually lie (actually the anchor used the word embellish) about their height by 1 ½ inches. Obviously, this means they claim to be taller than the actual physique that was given to them by the good Lord. This data was accumulated over time by asking over 2,000 Americans specific questions about their height and weight and, if they embellish, why.

Unfortunately, I missed this key part of the monologue highlighting the why part (bummer.) And, I can’t seem to find the poll on the Internet. But, common sense tells me that people say they are taller than they actually are simply because it just makes them feel better about themselves. After all, tallness in our society (up to a point), has always been viewed as being more attractive, stronger, more athletic, etc. That’s why (in my experience,) it’s usually those who lack height (how’s that for tact?), who typically add on an inch or two to their “official body length” when this topic comes up in a conversation.

Attention: Males with a 34 inch waistline are now fat

That’s the statement recently made by the Japanese Government to all of its male citizens.

Under a new national law, all companies and local governments must now measure the waistlines of Japanese people between the ages of 40 and 74 as part of annual checkups. Here’s the fun part – those exceeding government limits of 33.5 inches for men and 35.4 inches for women must obey dieting guidance if they don’t trim the love handles after three months. If necessary, those people will be steered toward further re-education after six more months. Worse case scenario, they (and their companies) can and will be fined penalties if they fail to squeeze into those government approved, tighter designer jeans.

Why is the government doing this? According to what I’ve read, it believes that a large percentage of this age group are over weight and, thus, are in danger of facing serious healthcare ailments (like diabetes). More to the point, the Ministry of Health believes that curbing widening waist lines will rein in a rapidly aging society’s ballooning healthcare costs.

Prospects don’t really want to hear about you

Robb High is a new business consultant who regularly sends out emails focusing on new business gaffes that advertising and public relations agencies make. Today, I received one about the art of giving a capabilities presentation (entitled “Agency Pitch Mistake #4”). Specifically, Robb wrote that clients think they’re supposed to ask agencies to “present their credentials.” The reality is that clients only do an agency review about 12 to 13 times over their entire career and don’t have much experience in conducting them. What they really want to do is talk about their business.

His comments are spot on and everyone should know it.

A long time ago, a consultant named Dr. Richard Harte taught our management team that when a prospect asks for a capabilities presentation, he is really saying “I’ve come to tell you about me and my company’s problems/opportunities.” Does the prospect want to understand what sets you and your agency apart? Of course. But, those differentiators need to be discussed in the context of showing how you understand the prospect’s pain, you can help the prospect’s business grow, what can truly distance his company from the rest and have you done it before in other relevant situations.

It’s not rocket science. In fact, this type of approach is really universal, across almost any industry or category. Since, I’m already giving away Peppercom’s secret presentation sauce (uh…that’s obviously a joke), here are a few more strategies we try to live by:

A rose by any other name…

This well known passage from Romeo and Juliet doesn’t always ring true in the world of marketing. No, names and all that they stand for (or symbolize,) are a critical part of corporate brand building.

That’s why I was amused with this article.

A design firm concocts the name Thornberg & Forester? Well, I have to give the partners a little credit. By publicizing this zany naming story, they hit a HUGE home run and were featured in Sunday’s New York Times business section. No doubt that will create a ton of visibility and exponentially raise the firm’s profile.

But, when all the smoke clears and attention wears off (and it eventually will,) Thornberg & Forester will still always be mistaken for a law firm, boutique investment bank, private banker or some other upper crust, white shoe financial services firm. That’s because to most in the business world, this name will conjure up attributes such as: traditional, history (or old), staid, exclusive, private, conservative and even stuffy.

Two CEOs are double trouble at Martha Stewart

Read between the lines of this story... It's easy to see a number of serious conflicts within the new leadership structure at Martha Stewart Living.

My prediction is that this full management team won't last more than a year. That's kind of ironic since Peppercom has been run for 13 years by two co-CEOs (and quite well, I might add.) The difference (in my view) is that we started the company together from nothing and naturally assumed our roles over time, through trust and a focus on doing what's best for the company.

Here are a number of reasons why Martha's company is heading for troubled times:

I have a dream...

I'm as cynical and down on our country's political system as one can be. I'm not telling anyone anything new but… the entire system is a never ending marathon for the elite to get reelected, or for the other political party to put another elite candidate in who has the best chance of beating out the incumbent.

Because of this reality, patronage and corruption runs deep, from the local to the national scene. And, even when honest, hard working politicians take over an official post, they still have to promise everything to the American public and create disingenuous images (think about every candidate kissing babies all along the campaign trail) to get elected. Let's face it, once they get into office, most of their ultimate decisions and votes are based on how they will be viewed come next election time and whether they are loyal to "the party" of choice. They don’t vote based on what is good for the people.